on internals@ on what apps have
> been successfully been run on 5.3 and whether they required any
> tweaking. If after we make a list there's still need to reach out I'd be
> happy to do some of that.
>
> Andi
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Maili
Given this:
use \MyProject\SubProjectA as A;
A\foo::someMethod();
The className given is to the autoload function is
"MyProject\SubProjectA\foo" not "\MyProject\SubProjectA\foo" (notice lack of
leading \)
I just wanted to verify that behaves as intended (which I'm gue
"Conflict Between Namespaced Functions and static class methods"
I think #3 ("use namespace" or "use class") makes the most sense. I assume if
there is a conflict without being explicit it would give an error? I also
assume in the even of no conflict you can still just say "use foo" and will
Hi Steph,
[snip]
This is very negative, Stas. "Everybody wants it so let's push it out
without testing". Do you really want a repeat of 5.0?
[/snip]
I don't think Stas is implying not to test it. We are talking about another
5.3 alpha, right? Clearly the beta and RC releases will allow the c
This is what I've be fearing. First slated for 5.0. Then 5.3. Now 6.0. It
appears there's consensus to rip it out which, in my prior post, I was all for
if people felt it meant getting it right. Apparently that is the case. I
guess my main question is what keeps this from being pushed yet
I'm against ditching it. This on-again-off-again affair with namespaces really
should be put to bed as I believe many in the community are really looking
forward to them. If it is taken out of 5.3 this same line of logic will be
used on all subsequent versions. I don't question it is a hard d
I disagree here...it is both wanted and and needed. This feature has been
promised to the community for quite some time now and I'd simply remind you you
do have the option of *not* using namespaces if you don't want too. If you
like REALLY_LONG_CLASS_NAMES that's still perfectly valid. Don't
For the untrained eye, would this then fix these bugs?
http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=33595
http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=33487
--Tony
- Original Message
From: David Wang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: internals@lists.php.net
Sent: Monday, October 8, 2007 2:12:31 AM
Subject: [PHP-DEV] Referen
Having watched this thread intently for the past few weeks, we seem to be
simply tripping over the semantics of it all, right?
Thinking a bit outside the box, how hard would it be to simply use both names,
one as an alias of the other? In the end the documentation will probably need
to outline
FWIW this is very much in line with bigwigs like IBM and how they manage
WebSphere releases (not that they are a model citizen but worth noting). I
personally see no problem with this but given how widespread PHP4 use is I'd
recommend maybe pushing the date out 3 more months to the March '08 t
As a PHP user also frustrated with lack and namespaces and having lurked here
for a while I know there was a prior proposal and many countless, lengthy
discussions on separators and all. Have the prior proposals been invalidated?
--Tony
- Original Message
From: Stefan Priebsch <[EMA
Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
FYI: You are mistaken if you think that moving from the old extensions
to PDO provides a speed improvement (there is rather decrease unless you
are using fetchAll()).
Sorry, I wasn't clear on this. Creole is the DB abstraction layer on top
of the "old extensions".
Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
IMHO a full ORM belongs into user space and not into C code. I kind of
like the approach that ADODB did, which was taking an existing DBAL and
moving selected items that where bottlenecks into C space. Thereby
providing a drop in speed improvement, while keeping the C
As a casual observer of this thread, this was the explanation that
really clarified the prior posts for me.
I think having option 3 (enforcement mode) would be great, however, if
everybody is tripping up on mis-managing expectations then I'd suggest a
play on semantics by calling it something
Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:
If you properly pick a
classname you almost never need to rename it let alone the methods
contained with the class. Plus namespaces are going to introduce their
own sets of problems where extension X adds namespace X, which some lib
already decided to use and we are b
While I could munge the class names in one or more packages as you
suggest then I'm in maintainability hell because when I need to update
one of the other packages (for security, features or bugfixes) you have
to do the name munging again.
C'mon, that ain't right. Next excuse?
--Tony
Patric
Ah, token_get_all() might be what I'm after.
Thanks,
--Tony
Jochem Maas wrote:
Tony Bibbs wrote:
First post here so be gentle ;-)
I've got a unique need to get the class definitions from a file. Now I
can write the string manipulation necessary to do this myself with the
help of
First post here so be gentle ;-)
I've got a unique need to get the class definitions from a file. Now I
can write the string manipulation necessary to do this myself with the
help of some regex-fu but I was wondering if it wouldn't be possible to
add a method like:
array getClassDefs(string
Original Message
Subject: RE: Custom PHP session handler (MS SQL) and
register_shutdown_function()?
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 17:12:41 +0100
From: James Cox
To: 'Tony Bibbs'
The list is now [EMAIL PROTECTED] ...
-Original Message-----
From: Tony Bibbs [mai
In PHP5 I noticed this behaviou with interfaces. If I have an interface
with a method that takes no paramaters, an implementing class for that
interfaces can have the same method take parameters...is that right?
For example:
interface foo {
public function myFunction();
}
class foobar impl
20 matches
Mail list logo
